If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Former Navy SEALs are speaking out after President Barack Obama referred to recent events in the Middle East, including the deaths of two former Navy SEALs, as "bumps in the road."
Tyrone S. Woods and Glen A. Doherty were providing security at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya when it was attacked on 9/11. They were both hailed in the aftermath of the attacks by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Both had gone into private security after retiring from the Navy after distinguished careers.

Former SEAL and current Montana State Senator Ryan Zinke issued the following statement:

The President refuses to admit that his policy of appeasement and apology has failed. The murder of our Ambassador and two former Navy SEALs is more than a "bump in the road," it is a global catastrophe where America is seen as being weak and vulnerable by our enemies. This President has failed to establish a red line for Iran's nuclear ambitions and has failed to recognize the scale and implications of the attacks against us. Reagan had it right: don't negotiate with terrorists and recognize the clear and present danger of not being willing to act or lead from the front.

Zinke has been a frequent critic of President Obama's foreign policy, and started a super PAC, Special Operations for America, that has released ads to that effect, including an ad highlighting Obama's bows to foreign monarchs.

Beyond the political debate, however, Navy SEALs are also a close-knit brotherhood, and do not take kindly to disrespect when lives are lost. President Obama's "bumps in the road" comment is particularly chafing because of the credit he has taken for the success of the SEALs in the raid against Osama bin Laden.

They are heroes when they return, and heroes when they fall--not just when it is politically convenient for those in power.

Good men sleep peaceably in their beds at night because
rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

From what I understand, post revolutionary Libya had what all these wartorn ME countries have... armed dudes (Mujadeen types) in a Toyota Hilux and AK-47s setting up shop as "security forces" in various towns and cities to presumably take on the responsibility of local law enforcement. Was reading this article in a paper, and apparently the Libyan government really liked the ambassador (on a personal level, he apparently did a lot of good there) and wants to have normal relations with the west... so after the attacks they said "okay, this is terrorist act... this is intolerable" and disarmed a bunch of the groups.

If true, seems like a reasonable first step. Dealing with these terrorist organizations means you can't let these ad-hoc warbands operate without authorization from the government. Because the embassy was attacked in a very coordinated and planned fashioned. Personally I think it was an attack specifically aimed to undermine US-Libyan relations, and had been planned long before the video was released.

No, they drove the militia out of Benghazi and are working on taking them out completely.

That's why I haven't been to outraged about the Libyan government's response. They immediately apologized, condemned the attack and within days had rendered the offending militia combat ineffective. Contrast that with Egypt, where Morsi didn't comment immediately, and didn't provide security to the embassy compound after the attack.

From what I understand, post revolutionary Libya had what all these wartorn ME countries have... armed dudes (Mujadeen types) in a Toyota Hilux and AK-47s setting up shop as "security forces" in various towns and cities to presumably take on the responsibility of local law enforcement. Was reading this article in a paper, and apparently the Libyan government really liked the ambassador (on a personal level, he apparently did a lot of good there) and wants to have normal relations with the west... so after the attacks they said "okay, this is terrorist act... this is intolerable" and disarmed a bunch of the groups.

No, they drove the militia out of Benghazi and are working on taking them out completely.

That's why I haven't been to outraged about the Libyan government's response. They immediately apologized, condemned the attack and within days had rendered the offending militia combat ineffective. Contrast that with Egypt, where Morsi didn't comment immediately, and didn't provide security to the embassy compound after the attack.

Okay, that makes sense, I haven't been following this as closely as I probably should. 'Preciate the input.